Tuesday, November 2, 2010


Designing and Implementing e-Government Strategy
1.      Defenition
Debate or debating is a formal method of interactive and representational argument. Debate is a broader form of argument than logical argument, which only examines consistency from axiom, and factual argument, which only examines what is or isn't the case or rhetoric which is a technique of persuasion. Though logical consistency, factual accuracy and some degree of emotional appeal to the audience are important elements of the art of persuasion; in debating, one side often prevails over the other side by presenting a superior "context" and/or framework of the issue, which is far more subtle and strategic.
2.      Parts
In debate there are a lot of big words used to describe the parts of debate. The topic of most debates is some form of plan, to move or change. This plan is called a resolution or bill.
In a debate there are at least two sides, someone who is for a said action and someone opposed to that action. The person or people who are for (in proponancy) the resolution or bill are the proponents or affirmative side. Someone is in negation (against) the resolution is oponincy or sometimes called the negative. The sides of a debate will often be abbreviated pro and con.
A constructive speech is the first speech given by a side. It is called constructive because it the debater puts forth the construction of his or her case by giving their claims and proof. After a constructive speech has been presented, a brebuttal speech is made in order to raise that person's case and attempt to weaken the opposition case.
When a speaker has a view they must be able to stand up for that view and that is why debates use the term to stand to mean your stance on the issue. One could say "I stand in firm opposition to the here mentioned resolution " or "I stand in negation of the resolution."
Evidence is the key to wining a forensic or political debate. For one to win a debate, they must be able to prove that they are right. For this to happen there must be evidence behind them. Imagine, if someone could go into a courtroom and say that a person stole from them, but not have to prove to the judge, with evidence.
The tag lines or names that you give your evidence become very important in debate. You and the judges will want to make very good notes, but there is a lot being said, so flowing is often used. Flowing is a note taking method where you list the sides of the debate and are make an outline of the speech as it is given.
3.      Techniques
Standards to be applied to rational thinking and arguments:
·         Clarity -- Do you understand the argument?
·         Accuracy -- Is it true? Can it be proven?
·         Precision -- Vague assertions are true until exceptions disprove.
·         Depth -- Is the argument comprehensive?
·         Breadth -- Does the argument cover all possibilities?
·         Logic -- Are there any fallacies?

No comments:

Post a Comment